Simple Minded Paradigms?
Celebrating Pre-Clovis
An article in Newsweek in May 1999 took a crack at describing the astounding paradigm shift that's occurring in archaeology today. I'm referring--so is the Newsweek article--to the complete reconfiguration of how we understand the populating of the American continents. The discoveries of the Monte Verde site, an occupation in Chile convincingly dated earlier than any Paleoindian site in North America, and the recent physical anthropology studies of Kennewick man and other early residents of the Americas, have completely altered the traditionally accepted theories. It's really an exciting time to be an archaeologist, to be perfectly honest; but true to international press form, instead of discussing the opportunities and excitement, the article focuses on the bitterness on the part of several scholars. I don't think that's a fair description of the state of archaeology, and in fact I'm sure it isn't the main reaction, which I gauge differently. Here's why.
In 1927, Ales Hrdlicka had a visitor. Hrdlicka was the physical anthropologist at the Smithsonian Institution. For the previous 40 years or so, a debate had raged in American archaeology over the length of time humans had been in the American continents. Hrdlicka had a reputation for extreme and obstreperous skepticism, and that reputation badly frightened the man who came to his office. That man, Jesse Figgins of the Denver Museum, had something to show Hrdlicka: two projectile points that had been found at a site where his museum had been digging the deeply buried bones of a bunch of bison--an extinct variety of bison--near the town of Folsom, New Mexico.
Figgins was a paleontologist, not an archaeologist; and Hrdlicka and colleague W.H.H. Holmes were both polite, but regretted that Figgins had not called in other scientists to see the in situ artifacts. Figgins took this advice to heart, and several months later, telegrams went out from the Denver Museum: the Folsom site bison contained embedded projectile points, and they were there to be seen. Shortly thereafter, Folsom became the first widely accepted peri-glacial site in the Americas.
According to David Meltzer, who has dedicated a certain portion of his career to studying the history of archaeology, the overall response in the archaeological community to the Folsom finds was relief, to have the forty year controversy finally settled; relief and excitement, I should think.
Like in the battles before Folsom was discovered, the scholarly battles over pre-Clovis sites have been fierce and painful, and they've been fought over decades. Like in those battles, many of the participants spoke warmly and uncautiously. Like in those battles, the issue has been resolved with the discovery and confirmation of one rock-solid archaeological site. How could we feel differently?
A collection of websites on possibly pre-Clovis archaeological sites and commentaries has been assembled for this feature. A bibliography on the Clovis First vs. Pre-Clovis debate has also been created; and a bibliography on early Paleoindian burials is also available.
See ya next week!
